2. 外语
  3. Do Clean Smell Encourage Clean Behavior Years ago, social scientists introduced the broken-windows theory of crime control,

Do Clean Smell Encourage Clean Behavior Years ago, social scientists introduced the broken-windows theory of crime control,

admin2013-05-19  54
问题                  Do Clean Smell Encourage Clean Behavior
    Years ago, social scientists introduced the broken-windows theory of crime control, which assumed that if a neighborhood looked orderly and cared for—with no broken windows—potential wrongdoers would be dissuaded from committing crimes there. Now psychologists have proposed a similar theory, which suggests that people can be induced to behave morally when their environment smells as clean as it looks.
    It’s the Macbeth principle of morality, says Katie Liljenquist, professor of organizational leadership at Brigham Young University’s Marriott School of Management and lead author of the new study, to be published in Psychological Science. "There is a strong link between moral and physical purity that people associate at a core level. People feel contaminated (受污染的) by immoral choices and try to wash away their sins," says Liljenquist. "To some degree, washing actually is effective in relieving guilt. What we wondered was whether you could regulate ethical behavior through cleanliness. We found that we could. "
    In two separate experiments, researchers were able to influence participants’ behavior by exposing them to "cleanliness" in the form of a common cleaning agent’s smell—in this case, orange-scented Windex (清新剂). It turned out that people who sat in a room sprayed with Windex were more likely to act fairly and charitably than those in unscented air.
    The first experiment involved an anonymous game of trust. The 28 study participants were told they would be "receivers," with whom a group of anonymous "senders" had been instructed to invest money. Participants were told that each sender had been given $ 4 and told that any part of it invested with receivers would be tripled. The job of the receiver, then, was to decide what portion of the dividends to return to the sender.
    In reality, there was no sender, and each study participant received $12, making it seem as though the senders had entrusted them with the full $ 4 they had been given. But would the receivers return that trust or exploit their unidentified investors? On average, those in the plain-smelling room returned $2.5 to the sender, pocketing the lion’s share of the money. But those bathed in the scent of Windex sent back an average of $ 5.5, returning the senders’ blind faith.
    The scientists insist they didn’t overdo it with the Windex, just a few spritzes(喷)—so we can get. rid of brain-cell death or poisoning-induced generosity as reasons why those receivers gave back so much of the stolen property. Rather, Liljenquist says, "a moral awareness was awakened in a clean-smelling environment. "
    In the second experiment, researchers aimed to manipulate people’s tendency toward charity. Ninety-nine participants were assigned to either a Windex-scented room or a neutral-smelling room and given a packet of tasks to complete. Included in the packet was a flyer requesting volunteers and donations to the charity Habitat for Humanity. As expected, people in the Windex-sprayed room were more inclined to volunteer and give money than those in the unscented room—22% of those in the clean group said they wanted to donate money, compared with 6% of the controls.
    According to co-author Adam Galinsky, a social psychologist at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management, society relies on incentives(刺激，动机), in the form of rewards and punishments, to encourage people to adjust to certain standards of behavior. "Economists and even psychologists haven’t been paying much attention to the fact that small changes in our environment can have dramatic effects on behavior. We underemphasize these subtle environmental cues," he says.
    Liljenquist says the real-life implications of the study could be as simple as an office investing more in janitorial supplies (清洁用品) than in expensive investigation equipment to keep workers in line. Other researchers suggest, however, that perhaps it wasn’t the clean smell that made people more virtuous in the new study, but rather the smell of orange; that is, people may have behaved better because they smelled something they liked, rather than something "clean." "It could be simply that a positive smell creates a positive mood, which encourages positive behavior. You cannot conclude it is cleanliness of itself," says Brown University psychologist Rachel Herz, author of The Scent of Desire. To rule out the contradictory factor of good smells, she says, the study’s authors could have added a third room to the experiment scented with recently baked chocolate chip cookies, for example.
    Nevertheless, both morality researchers and olfactory(嗅觉的) scientists agree that people do strongly associate physical cleanliness with purity of conscience. It is the notion at the heart of proverbs like "cleanliness is next to godliness" and evidenced by the widespread use of cleansing ceremonies to wash away sins in various religions around the world. (Truth be told, that practice is merely a reckoning of an evolutionary strategy to avoid disease.)
    For their part, Liljenquist and Galinsky say they controlled for the good-mood effect by giving participants in the second experiment a mood-screening questionnaire. They also say their results are consistent with existing written material on cleanliness and morality. For instance, in one of Liljenquist’s earlier studies, she found, among other things, that cleaning hands after writing about a moral violation made people feel less guilty about it. Other researchers have also tackled the issue of morality and smell, but from the opposite end of the scope. A paper published last year in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin revealed that people are more critical and judgmental about certain moral issues when exposed to the vapors of a smelly-scented spray.
    Yes, a smelly-scented spray is a commercially available product. By the way, according to a psychologist who has worked with it in experiments, it is nearly impossible to get rid of it.
    Orange-scented Windex certainly makes for a nicer lab environment, which perhaps has something to do with Liljenquist’s continued interest in this line of study. "Research on how to stay on the moral high ground and promote virtue," she says, "is something I find refreshing. "  
What’s the flaw of the experiment according to Rachel Herz?
选项 A、It should have added a third room with orange smell.
B、It should have used chocolate cookies’ smell instead of Windex spray.
C、It didn’t exclude the factor of good smell from clean smell.
D、It didn’t provide the subjects with chocolate cookies.
答案C
解析 根据题干关键词Rachel Herz，flaw定位到原文第9段最后一句：To rule out the contradictory factor of good smells, she says, the study’s authors could have added a third room to the experiment scented with recently baked chocolate chip cookies, for example. 可知Rachel Herz认为实验并没有把“清洁的气味(clean smell)”与“令人愉悦的气味(good smell)”区分开来，实验中应该再加入一个房间，来排除令人愉悦的气味影响行为的解释。C)项符合文意。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/18g7777K
0

大学英语四级

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)